Dan Gilbert
Former Cavaliers GM
Sophomore
Posts: 457
Apr 4, 2024 17:22:13 GMT
|
Post by Dan Gilbert on Jul 19, 2013 2:38:29 GMT
78ish was what I was thinking as well. I just wanted to go over his individual ratings before I started a thread for him to see what could be raised to bring up his rating.
He is a defensive specialist. Very raw offensively but I think some of his offensive ratings can go up. He isn't that bad on the offensive end. Definitely a put-back/alley-oop scorer but knows what to do around the basket.
|
|
|
Post by Blake Bowman on Jul 19, 2013 2:50:10 GMT
I like the Bucks, and really like Sanders. 78 does sound like a good rating for him.
|
|
Dan Gilbert
Former Cavaliers GM
Sophomore
Posts: 457
Apr 4, 2024 17:22:13 GMT
|
Post by Dan Gilbert on Aug 17, 2013 7:50:12 GMT
Bueller?
|
|
Glenn Robinson
Milwaukee Bucks
Starter
Posts: 1,226
Mar 2, 2024 5:20:47 GMT
|
Post by Glenn Robinson on Aug 17, 2013 12:38:00 GMT
I think he deserves to be higher than a 78. He was one of if not the best rim protector in the league last year. His defensive alone is a game changer. I'd put him at an 82 personally.
|
|
Dan Gilbert
Former Cavaliers GM
Sophomore
Posts: 457
Apr 4, 2024 17:22:13 GMT
|
Post by Dan Gilbert on Aug 17, 2013 21:53:45 GMT
I think he deserves to be higher than a 78. He was one of if not the best rim protector in the league last year. His defensive alone is a game changer. I'd put him at an 82 personally. +1
|
|
|
Post by Lew Alcindor on Sept 4, 2013 21:30:57 GMT
Sanders' blocks should be Ibaka-esq. Athletics and Low Post D should be pretty high as well. Both O and D Rebounding should be high. he avg 9.5 rpg in 27mpg; his touch around the rim is solid enough on offence. 78-79 agreed
|
|
|
Post by Lew Alcindor on Sept 9, 2013 17:35:40 GMT
bump
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Sept 9, 2013 20:36:59 GMT
Modifying this post to make it clear, I'm changing my mind. I had 79 before, I'm changing it to an 81.
I've been looking into him lately, basically a double double (9.8 & 9.5) in only 27 mpg. 2.8 blocks in that time. Only 1.2 TO/g, for a big man that is very low, doesn't hurt the team there. Not a great FT guy but about 62% from a big man is a lot better than some of the other bigs out there. He's not great there but he's not bad like a Dwight.
Anyway, definitely needs a boost, I think 78 is just too cautious, he played all season and did great, it's not like he only did it for a month or two.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Sept 10, 2013 20:06:51 GMT
Most people are saying 78, I agree.
|
|